Dyno Results (Round 2): TP 91 Oct Tune / 3.5" AF1 / Maggie SIDO
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,009
Likes: 0
From: In a van down by the river
Originally Posted by jmt0645
duke sent you a PM.
Duke
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,824
Likes: 0
From: North Huntingdon,Pa.
?
Originally Posted by F150 Duke
Lost it actually. It's not a big deal, the A/F is better but still a little off.
The 3.5" should perform better then the 3.0" and 3.25" AF1. The SIDO should also help over the SISO. Like I said though it's not that big of a deal. I'm not worried about peak, but rather a consistent A/F ratio, and steady even HP and TRQ curve.
It'll be easier to see what I mean tomorrow on the graphs. I keep trying to upload them and it errors out so I'll just try again at work tomorrow.
The 3.5" should perform better then the 3.0" and 3.25" AF1. The SIDO should also help over the SISO. Like I said though it's not that big of a deal. I'm not worried about peak, but rather a consistent A/F ratio, and steady even HP and TRQ curve.
It'll be easier to see what I mean tomorrow on the graphs. I keep trying to upload them and it errors out so I'll just try again at work tomorrow.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,009
Likes: 0
From: In a van down by the river
Originally Posted by openclasspro#11
for peak tq and hp- siso,for sound-sido-thats why troers sc'ed is running the siso-phil
Originally Posted by www.troyerperformance.com
This 3" single Magnaflow cat-back exhaust gains anywhere from 11 HP at the rear wheels on the 4.6 to as much as 14.7 HP at the wheels on the new 300 HP 3-valve 5.4 motors - along with gaining torque everywhere.
Originally Posted by www.troyerperformance.com
This 3" Single In/Dual 2.5" out Magnaflow cat-back exhaust gains anywhere from 11 HP at the rear wheels on the 4.6 to as much as 16.7 HP at the wheels on the new 300 HP 3-valve 5.4 motors - along with gaining torque everywhere.
I recieved a call from Neil discussing the results and we agreed that while it's closer on the A/F, we did lose quite a bit of HP and TRQ throughout the curve and especially at peak. Which is confusing because as the A/F becomes leaner and more inline, we should produce more HP.
Mike will be back in the office in a few days and will look at the info then.
Duke
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,009
Likes: 0
From: In a van down by the river
Just a side note as a reminder to anyone about to dyno and data log. Make sure your files are setup before hand and practice data logging by doing your no load data logging first. Then by the time you get on the dyno, you're comfortable doing data logging. It never fails, you'll have some connection problem with livelink, I promise. It's happened to me everytime so far where it won't connect for some reason but then will after repeating the steps a few times.
Duke
Duke
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,009
Likes: 0
From: In a van down by the river
Just not letting this thread get too deep so I can find it later on. As have I, Troyer has been a very busy man lately, so I'm anticipating a third week wait until my data is looked at.
Duke
Duke
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,009
Likes: 0
From: In a van down by the river
Hello All,
Mike and I spoke for quite a long time (roughly 2 hours) discussing all sorts of things regarding vehicles and also my results.
We both feel my scenario was "unique" for multiple reasons which I'll quickly summarize as it'd be a 10 page post to tell you everything we discussed.
1. The initial dyno plots showed a "unusual" spike where we instanting showed multiplicative increases in HP and TRQ over a VERY short increase in RPMs. This is most likely due to torque spike which is brought on by the way the vehicle is driven on the dyno.
2. Just a basic point and that is even the same dyno, with similar conditions and the same truck can vary +/- 5 HP/Torque on any given day.
3. The initial dive of my current A/F ratio is necessary when going into open loop on a 3V motor as it can take advantage of the additional fuel where a 2V and 4V won't benefit. I won't go into details why as this is part of Mike's trade secrets and I don't feel comfortable giving that information, even if he is. I don't know a 1/4th of the important secrets, but I still don't feel comfortable sharing what I do know now.
4. We could back out some of the fuel but I risk losing some HP and TRQ along the curve.
5. Apparently I did have a 3.25" AF1 in hand. This makes my off the charts rich all that more interesting in that it could have been a truck that was rich from the factory (Mike says less then 5% are this way) and needed a variation in the transfer function.
Short synopsis on this-
5a. Received the AF1 and tunes
5b. Dyno'd off the charts rich
5c. Received a new 3.5" AF1 (courtesy of TP)
5d. Pulled a lean code with new 3.5" AF1 and 3.25" AF1 tunes
5e. Got adjusted tunes from TP and dyno'd to get my current results
6. I received new tunes today to adjust some small things that mostly impact torque in overdrive.
I'll be loading them up after work and be giving them a try.
Thanks again Mike and Troyer Performance!
Duke
Mike and I spoke for quite a long time (roughly 2 hours) discussing all sorts of things regarding vehicles and also my results.
We both feel my scenario was "unique" for multiple reasons which I'll quickly summarize as it'd be a 10 page post to tell you everything we discussed.
1. The initial dyno plots showed a "unusual" spike where we instanting showed multiplicative increases in HP and TRQ over a VERY short increase in RPMs. This is most likely due to torque spike which is brought on by the way the vehicle is driven on the dyno.
2. Just a basic point and that is even the same dyno, with similar conditions and the same truck can vary +/- 5 HP/Torque on any given day.
3. The initial dive of my current A/F ratio is necessary when going into open loop on a 3V motor as it can take advantage of the additional fuel where a 2V and 4V won't benefit. I won't go into details why as this is part of Mike's trade secrets and I don't feel comfortable giving that information, even if he is. I don't know a 1/4th of the important secrets, but I still don't feel comfortable sharing what I do know now.
4. We could back out some of the fuel but I risk losing some HP and TRQ along the curve.
5. Apparently I did have a 3.25" AF1 in hand. This makes my off the charts rich all that more interesting in that it could have been a truck that was rich from the factory (Mike says less then 5% are this way) and needed a variation in the transfer function.
Short synopsis on this-
5a. Received the AF1 and tunes
5b. Dyno'd off the charts rich
5c. Received a new 3.5" AF1 (courtesy of TP)
5d. Pulled a lean code with new 3.5" AF1 and 3.25" AF1 tunes
5e. Got adjusted tunes from TP and dyno'd to get my current results
6. I received new tunes today to adjust some small things that mostly impact torque in overdrive.
I'll be loading them up after work and be giving them a try.
Thanks again Mike and Troyer Performance!
Duke
Last edited by F150 Duke; Feb 20, 2007 at 03:12 PM.
Former Sponsor
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 13,385
Likes: 4
From: Virginia
You're very welcome Duke, & it was fun spending all that time analyzing your data yesterday - people would be amazed at how much info was garnered.
For example, we actually gained 3 HP peak from the 3.5" AF1 over the 3.25" AF1 at the peak, and a lot more than that down low. But we had to look at the data differently than what we were doing at first to see that. Load up Run 5 and you'll see the 263 RWHP as compared to the previous 260 & 261 peak runs in November. And of course, we gained some very nice power everywhere else, with the exception of that 1000 rpm range that was affected by that abnormal spike - so in reality, I feel confident that very nice power was gained everywhere, with the most being in the lower to mid range, and the least being at the absolute peak, which is precisely what the 3.5" unit does over the 3.25" unit.
Boy, we were at it for quite a while yesterday, it did indeed take a couple of hours oh the phone for you & I to go over everything - usually I do not do that with the customer on the phone as it takes so long, so I'm usually doing that by myself - but in this case, we just had the opportunity to do that together, so to speak, so it was fun going over all of that & showing you the actual differences & how to interpret the data, etc.
After we talked, I decided to make a couple of other changes, in addition to getting you the new Program 1 & 2 that we "owed" you with the new changes for the 3.5" AF1. And over time, as adaptive does it's thing, it will actually lean it out a little bit - not a lot, but a little bit.
Have fun!
For example, we actually gained 3 HP peak from the 3.5" AF1 over the 3.25" AF1 at the peak, and a lot more than that down low. But we had to look at the data differently than what we were doing at first to see that. Load up Run 5 and you'll see the 263 RWHP as compared to the previous 260 & 261 peak runs in November. And of course, we gained some very nice power everywhere else, with the exception of that 1000 rpm range that was affected by that abnormal spike - so in reality, I feel confident that very nice power was gained everywhere, with the most being in the lower to mid range, and the least being at the absolute peak, which is precisely what the 3.5" unit does over the 3.25" unit.
Boy, we were at it for quite a while yesterday, it did indeed take a couple of hours oh the phone for you & I to go over everything - usually I do not do that with the customer on the phone as it takes so long, so I'm usually doing that by myself - but in this case, we just had the opportunity to do that together, so to speak, so it was fun going over all of that & showing you the actual differences & how to interpret the data, etc.
After we talked, I decided to make a couple of other changes, in addition to getting you the new Program 1 & 2 that we "owed" you with the new changes for the 3.5" AF1. And over time, as adaptive does it's thing, it will actually lean it out a little bit - not a lot, but a little bit.
Have fun!
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,009
Likes: 0
From: In a van down by the river
Originally Posted by Superchips_Distributor
You're very welcome Duke, & it was fun spending all that time analyzing your data yesterday - people would be amazed at how much info was garnered.
For example, we actually gained 3 HP peak from the 3.5" AF1 over the 3.25" AF1 at the peak, and a lot more than that down low. But we had to look at the data differently than what we were doing at first to see that. Load up Run 5 and you'll see the 263 RWHP as compared to the previous 260 & 261 peak runs in November. And of course, we gained some very nice power everywhere else, with the exception of that 1000 rpm range that was affected by that abnormal spike - so in reality, I feel confident that very nice power was gained everywhere, with the most being in the lower to mid range, and the least being at the absolute peak, which is precisely what the 3.5" unit does over the 3.25" unit.
Boy, we were at it for quite a while yesterday, it did indeed take a couple of hours oh the phone for you & I to go over everything - usually I do not do that with the customer on the phone as it takes so long, so I'm usually doing that by myself - but in this case, we just had the opportunity to do that together, so to speak, so it was fun going over all of that & showing you the actual differences & how to interpret the data, etc.
After we talked, I decided to make a couple of other changes, in addition to getting you the new Program 1 & 2 that we "owed" you with the new changes for the 3.5" AF1. And over time, as adaptive does it's thing, it will actually lean it out a little bit - not a lot, but a little bit.
Have fun!
For example, we actually gained 3 HP peak from the 3.5" AF1 over the 3.25" AF1 at the peak, and a lot more than that down low. But we had to look at the data differently than what we were doing at first to see that. Load up Run 5 and you'll see the 263 RWHP as compared to the previous 260 & 261 peak runs in November. And of course, we gained some very nice power everywhere else, with the exception of that 1000 rpm range that was affected by that abnormal spike - so in reality, I feel confident that very nice power was gained everywhere, with the most being in the lower to mid range, and the least being at the absolute peak, which is precisely what the 3.5" unit does over the 3.25" unit.
Boy, we were at it for quite a while yesterday, it did indeed take a couple of hours oh the phone for you & I to go over everything - usually I do not do that with the customer on the phone as it takes so long, so I'm usually doing that by myself - but in this case, we just had the opportunity to do that together, so to speak, so it was fun going over all of that & showing you the actual differences & how to interpret the data, etc.
After we talked, I decided to make a couple of other changes, in addition to getting you the new Program 1 & 2 that we "owed" you with the new changes for the 3.5" AF1. And over time, as adaptive does it's thing, it will actually lean it out a little bit - not a lot, but a little bit.
Have fun!
I'll post here on how the butt dyno feels but we all know how INCREDIBLY subjective that is.
Thanks again,
Duke
